Three different methods were used in an evaluation of a smoking cessation study: surveys, focus groups, and phenomenological interviews. The results of each method were analyzed separately and then combined using both a pragmatic and dialectic stance to examine the effects of different approaches to mixing methods. Results show that the further apart the methods are philosophically, the more diverse the findings. Comparisons of decision maker opinions and costs of the different methods are provided along with recommendations for evaluators' uses of different methods.
|Original language||English (US)|
|Number of pages||8|
|Journal||Evaluation and Program Planning|
|State||Published - Feb 1 2016|
Bibliographical noteFunding Information:
The authors wish to acknowledge ClearWay SM Minnesota for partial funding of this research.
© 2015 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
- Cost analysis
- Mixed methods
- Smoking cessation